StandardShift.com

I see the forum is pretty dead lately. I've pretty much given up looking for a car since I Can't really find anything I like.

I did kind of take a slight interest to the refreshed Sonic that is coming out. It made me wonder, how are non sporty turbo cars? I drove a 1.8t Golf but it was automatic (Thanks Potownrob!) haha

So, do they tune all of the fun out of them? Or can you have some fun in some of these base model turbo cars such as the 1.4 turbo from GM and VW?

I'm going to have to go with a no but with some disclaimers. I test drove a ton of cars last year before ending up with my GTI but I did test drive cars that fit the bill for this thread. For the most part, they felt really pedestrian in nature and were tuned for fuel economy so they really felt no different then a N/A engine making similar power. For the amount of money you'll probably dip in with a stage tune and upgrades you could've probably gotten a GTI or Focus ST at a discount. I actually really liked my seat time with the Sonic (last gen)... I would've shamelessly got one. The interior was pretty terrible but I liked the character and qwirkyness of a lot of things that they ironed away in the refresh.

You also have to realize in the example of Golf TSI vs GTI that the GTI gets a ton of after market support while the TSI gets the shaft in some instances. Especially when it comes to tunes, drive train mods, and overall engine stuff. I still don't even think anyone makes a short shift kit for the 5 speed TSI and a ton of people are still waiting for that.

It all depends on what specific cars you're evaluating and what you find fun. Most of the non-sporting turbo cars are targeted at getting better EPA MPG ratings for CAFE reasons. They're basically the same cars they would have been a generation ago with a snail taking the place of 1-2 cylinders, which is to say, they're just plain cars.

If you're the sort to get giddy primarily with push in the back associated with injudicious application of the pedal on the right, a pedestrian turboed offering will probably be as disappointing to you as a base-engine pedestrian offering from the last generation. My experience has been that most offerings these days are decent enough cars in general driving experience, having at least a little of what would have in prior years been described as European driving dynamics (to varying extents depending on corporate design philosophy). In my personal view, a clutch pedal also forgives a lot.

The frustrations I'd personally have with several of the newer manuals I've driven would be attributable to the EPA and safety features. Excessive rev hang is pretty obnoxious. I also had an interesting experience with a six-speed Regal GS that took several seconds to decide I really did mean to heel-and-toe. That said, still better than an automatic, and all that could probably be addressed with an aftermarket tune if you were so motivated.

from the perspective of someone who has been driving a lowly automatic golf tsi for over 3 months now, GET ONE NOW!! it took about 1-2 months to really figure out the throttle and dynamics of this car but, now that i'm more used to it, it's a hoot to drive, even with the slushbox. i'm not even sure i would consider the manual. i do wish they had the DSG on the lowly golf, but the regular auto is good as long as you aren't obsessed with manually shifting through the gears (i almost never shift it manually). the 1.8 TSI is also not what i would consider an economy turbo engine, or whatever the other posters are referring to; a 1.4 or smaller turbo will not be as fun as a 1.8 or bigger turbo. even stock, this engine is hilarious once you figure out how to work it. get the (mk7) GTI if you can but, otherwise, the mk7 Golf is a nice alternative.

potownrob wrote:from the perspective of someone who has been driving a lowly automatic golf tsi for over 3 months now, GET ONE NOW!! it took about 1-2 months to really figure out the throttle and dynamics of this car but, now that i'm more used to it, it's a hoot to drive, even with the slushbox. i'm not even sure i would consider the manual. i do wish they had the DSG on the lowly golf, but the regular auto is good as long as you aren't obsessed with manually shifting through the gears (i almost never shift it manually). the 1.8 TSI is also not what i would consider an economy turbo engine, or whatever the other posters are referring to; a 1.4 or smaller turbo will not be as fun as a 1.8 or bigger turbo. even stock, this engine is hilarious once you figure out how to work it. get the (mk7) GTI if you can but, otherwise, the mk7 Golf is a nice alternative.

Yeah the 1.8T is definitely not slouchy what so ever. It's originally the car I wanted and felt satisfied with but because of packaging, 5 speed manual only, and pushing upwards I ended up with the GTI. I really would've rather of had the TSI Golf and a bit more feature base line then feeling like I had to get pushed into the GTI and really only drive it at 60% capacity at the most. I really never felt any strong urge to do anything engine performance mod wise to this car even though people do right out of the box. They say the 2.0L is very proactive with piggy backs and light tunes even though but it's my clutch and stellar fuel economy that I'd be most worried about.

I digress though- I think the VW Golf 1.8L and the Civic 1.5L turbo are in a league of it's own and possible exceptions to the rule. The VW 1.4L and the Eco tec 1.4L - you have to be realistic in poise and purpose though. If you're realistically in the market though maybe even see if a Veloster Turbo/Kia Forte Koup SX is a flavor that speaks for you. Those are engines that have "sporting intention" but at an economy price. It might fit a healthy medium without breaking the bank though I think those engines are inferior to what they are really meant to be plotted against.

P.S. - I think I read the title with some sort of dyslexia because originally I read it as "Are non turbo sport cars fun?" and I knew you had a Civic of sorts and I was ready to bring the guns out

I have a VW Jetta 1.4 (have had it for the past 4 months). I admit I haven't driven many manual cars (this is the first one I've owned), but anyway, here's my 2 cents:

It's definitely more fun than an automatic, but I'm not sure if that's enough for you to be interesting in getting such a car. While my car is no rocketship, it's reasonably powerful (~140 HP, can't remember the peak RPM and ~180 lb-ft of torque at 1,400 RPM) and is capable of much more than getting out of its own way. Again, as a new manual driver, my opinion might be different that that of a seasoned manual driver, but I find it quite fun to get it up to speed, going through the gears. But of course, we all have different thoughts on what are cars should have/do/etc. What makes a car fun in your mind?

If I were you, I'd definitely test drive the Sonic if you're interested, or any other turbo cars for that matter. Just remember not to expect it to be a poor man's sports car because you might be disappointed. It would be best to think about it as a small car that's not ridiculously under-powered.

I only have seat time in my ST and my friend's F150. The truck is pretty hilarious in sport mode and the ST is well...fun, even though I'm not exactly a boy racer wannabe.

The big issue that I have with the current day Sonic on the refresh... is that it lost a lot of it's unique character that distinguished it in a class full of "me-too's". It basically is another me-too car now. I'm not sure if this is actually a refresh or an actual "new gen" but I'm thinking the latter. I think out of all of the newer Chevy's it wears the corporate grill the worst also (it looks like the old car with it just plastered on). I think if they essentially left most of the car the same and addressed the interior quality I would of really seriously considered this car. The interior panels on the dash and door panels honestly had the consistency of plastic sandpaper. Other cars in it's class hide the cheapness better on the inside for sure where this one kind of feels exposed.

I wonder if they still have the Borla catback option for these... it actually sounded pretty decent to my ears.

I digress, but if we're strictly speaking on the class nothing will ever beat the Honda Fit until another brand can figure out the magic seat configuration and come close to matching the cargo volume.

Ah bummer... I was kind of hoping for a bit of a poor man's sports car. A shame that a lot of V6's are being phased out with the stick. I've seen 0-60 times for a lot of these cars with disappointing figures. Plus I've seen a lot where they're not really getting great mileage anyways.

bk7794 wrote:Ah bummer... I was kind of hoping for a bit of a poor man's sports car. A shame that a lot of V6's are being phased out with the stick. I've seen 0-60 times for a lot of these cars with disappointing figures. Plus I've seen a lot where they're not really getting great mileage anyways.

You can get better than sticker with premium and a moderately light foot, not anti-social hypermiling.

Edit: non-oxy premium if you can find it.

bk7794 wrote:Ah bummer... I was kind of hoping for a bit of a poor man's sports car. A shame that a lot of V6's are being phased out with the stick. I've seen 0-60 times for a lot of these cars with disappointing figures. Plus I've seen a lot where they're not really getting great mileage anyways.

V6 and stick a rare bird at this point. V6's in general are essentially phased out in most consumer car platforms.. made a reference back in the community thread how I had a chance to have some seat time in my mothers 2006 Hyundai Azera which was 3.8L v6. I loved the way they engine felt and how seamless it was about putting power down. V6 and stick the first two entries that come to mind is probably the new Camaro and Jaguar F type.

I think an Achilles heel when I was researching about the Sonic (again mind you before the refresh) was the gas mileage sucked with the 1.4L. Like it was literally on par with what I was getting with my 2.4L N/A Kia boat anchor. If I'm going to be driving a car in that class, 38-40 mpg has to be a reasonable thought and at the very least possible.

Consumption be done about fuel smileage?

It is an edifying exercise to multiply one's annual smiles driven by an expected fuel cost figure ($/gallon) and then divide that product by various smiles-per-gallon figures. This allows one, or two, to look at annual fuel cost as a function of smiles per gallon. As the smiles per gallon go lower and lower, the yearly costs are very sensitive to even fractions of a smile per gallon, but as the smiles per gallon grow large, there isn't much yearly cost difference for even a 5 smile per gallon difference in fuel smileage.

BK I'm not too sure how you feel about the new Civic but color me intrigued. Turbocharged, manual, 4 dr hatchback... that starts at 20k. Probably has enough grunt for most and really seems like a damn good value to me.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/saves-the- ... -at-20535/

once again, they make you get the CVT to get the luxury and comfort features. once again (repeating accord sport history), the sport model cuts out key highend features that people asked for with the accord sport. will check back in a few years, honda...

I remember driving a rented Expedition with the EcoBoosted double-snail configuration. That thing really moved out of it's way and then some, given that it's like a 7500 lb truck or some such.

I wouldn't mind an EcoBoost F150 truth be told.